linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] btrfs: push memalloc_nofs_save/restore() out of alloc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20251003132535.42760-1-rtapadia730@gmail.com>
Date: Fri,  3 Oct 2025 18:55:35 +0530
From: rtapadia730@...il.com
To: fdmanana@...nel.org
Cc: clm@...com,
	david.hunter.linux@...il.com,
	dsterba@...e.com,
	fdmanana@...e.com,
	khalid@...nel.org,
	linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	rtapadia730@...il.com,
	skhan@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs: push memalloc_nofs_save/restore() out of alloc_bitmap()

Thank you for the review and explanation.


> We test btrfs with fstests. The sanity tests aren't enough, they are
> mostly to test internal functions.
> Please don't declare variables in the middle of the code.
> We always declare variables at the top of the current scope.
Okay I will remember this for future patches.


> Just fix the comment, removing the TODO and mention that the reason we
> can't recurse is because we are holding a transaction handle open - it
> doesn't matter if we are in critical section of a transaction commit
> or not - all it matters is that we are holding a transaction handle
> open, so a GFP_KERNEL allocation results in a deadlock if it recurses
> to the filesystem to commit the transaction.
I'll send a v2 patch that just removes TODO and update the comment for 
clearity.